Packers Huddle

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:17

Tuesday can't come soon enough so we will find out what AR's planning on doing this year.

ahhhh, hopefully we like Tuesdays news

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:29

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:06

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:00

the union can not force players not to train, what they can do is stop it from being manditory, which they have done.

again this goes right back to ownership saying if you hurt yourself outside of team facility's or non sanctioned practice we can void your contract, both sides seem at fault to me.

I mean I don't see what's so wrong about that. If a player is going to train, I would want them be trained at my facilities under my employee's supervision. The risk grows exponentially when you have 90 players under contract training and do whatever they want.

your bouncing here, if the team will void there contract then if Love or EQ where hurt the team can cut and void those contracts, what incentive do players have to work out? that is a team issue that goes against a players ability to improve

and a team if so desires can carry 53 QB's, seriously, no team should ever carry less then 3.

If that were the case yoop. If there was this existential risk that the team would actually "cut a player" if they got hurt off team facilities...don't you think players I don't know...wouldn't train off campus?

What was negotiated is that teams have had to significantly reduce TC practices, eliminate 2 a days, eliminate padded and contact practices both in TC and during the season and also extremely limit the Mandatory Minicamp, OTA, and offseason weight lifting program. The offseason weight lifting program has been cut by over a month.

And from what I understand, there is quite a bit of limitation of how much a coach can even communicate or be one on one with a player during non-team events time.

And I literally have zero clue what you are talking about with the 53 QBs comment.

Once again accusing me of "bouncing" and then doing it blatantly on your own.

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:17

Tuesday can't come soon enough so we will find out what AR's planning on doing this year.

I wouldn't get too confident we will know by Tuesday.

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:36

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:17

Tuesday can't come soon enough so we will find out what AR's planning on doing this year.

I wouldn't get too confident we will know by Tuesday.

Isn't Tuesday the first day of training camp?

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:38

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:36

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:17

Tuesday can't come soon enough so we will find out what AR's planning on doing this year.

I wouldn't get too confident we will know by Tuesday.

Isn't Tuesday the first day of training camp?

It likely is.

There is a very strong chance he doesn't show up to TC right away which means we will continue to just have questions.

1. Will he come later?
2. Will he come before week 1?
3. Will he come during the season?

If Rodgers isn't in GB next week, we will continue to know as little as we do today....for the exception of the "probability of a 2021 SB season being hopeful" goes down.

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:35

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:29

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:06

I mean I don't see what's so wrong about that. If a player is going to train, I would want them be trained at my facilities under my employee's supervision. The risk grows exponentially when you have 90 players under contract training and do whatever they want.

your bouncing here, if the team will void there contract then if Love or EQ where hurt the team can cut and void those contracts, what incentive do players have to work out? that is a team issue that goes against a players ability to improve

and a team if so desires can carry 53 QB's, seriously, no team should ever carry less then 3.

If that were the case yoop. If there was this existential risk that the team would actually "cut a player" if they got hurt off team facilities...don't you think players I don't know...wouldn't train off campus?

What was negotiated is that teams have had to significantly reduce TC practices, eliminate 2 a days, eliminate padded and contact practices both in TC and during the season and also extremely limit the Mandatory Minicamp, OTA, and offseason weight lifting program. The offseason weight lifting program has been cut by over a month.

And from what I understand, there is quite a bit of limitation of how much a coach can even communicate or be one on one with a player during non-team events time.

And I literally have zero clue what you are talking about with the 53 QBs comment.

Once again accusing me of "bouncing" and then doing it blatantly on your own.

point is a team can train more then a couple QB's

and running routes in shorts are considered non padded practice, and again the CBA does not limit players from training, they simply stop a team from forcing it, also I want to see where it is written where a coach can't have a informal training session with willing players, the players voted to limit there exposure to injury, what I'am trying to point out is that non padded practicing with non impact drills does eliminate most of the risk of injury, it's not as though I expect QB's to pad up and run RO against a full throttle defense, we can coach up QB's more if we want to, seems the union and owners want to limit this stuff hoping it's more fair and equal to all 32 teams.

https://nflpa.com/active-players/off-season-rules

nothing about limiting non padded practice, thing is both players and coaches might want some financial support and insurance coverage, the only side it seems that want to limit voluntary practice are the owners.

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:46

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:38

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:36

I wouldn't get too confident we will know by Tuesday.

Isn't Tuesday the first day of training camp?

It likely is.

There is a very strong chance he doesn't show up to TC right away which means we will continue to just have questions.

1. Will he come later?
2. Will he come before week 1?
3. Will he come during the season?

If Rodgers isn't in GB next week, we will continue to know as little as we do today....for the exception of the "probability of a 2021 SB season being hopeful" goes down.

Good lord. I am very weary of this soap opera, frankly. Come on, Aaron! Make up your damn mind and stop with these freaking games. **** or get off the pot.

bud fox wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 01:33

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 00:14

bud fox wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2021 22:15

Post first year.
It is subjective - lots of people believe he is right and people also don't

Most is subjective, sure, but parts are not. For example, there were 2 full NFL seasons between resigning Rodgers and drafting Love, almost 20 full months. Trying to say it was the first year into the extension is factually wrong.

Ultimately the packers can break whatever promise they made underlining the contract but Rodgers cant break his contract if that promise is broken.

Rodgers is currently breaking his contract and will do so more if he does not show up for training camp. Again, factual wrong.

"here is the extension we going to be going for it whilst we are lucky enough to have you" first year of extension done "yeah sorry we going to invest in the future now, hope you're cool for that if not bad luck you are signed for the next 3-4 years or whatever"

Again, factually incorrect, after the 2nd year of the extension. The team invests in the future, EVERY SINGLE DRAFT. Every team does. It is pretty telling though if he is threatened by said draft pick. If he is so good, there isn't much of a worry, especially since the team already wanted to extend him again.

What Rodgers is doing now is the standard playbook and the only real options a player has to express unhappiness and hope to change the situation.

This is standard? If so standard, I would love to hear of all the other examples. You are correct though, it is the only real option, but his reasonings behind it are completely sophomoric.

First year of extension years. Not first year from signing.

Semantics - I mean terminate the contract and go play somewhere else.

Again you are on signing date and not new years of extension.

Any single player that has ever held out which is plenty. There is nothing else you can really do as a player under contract.

What does first year of the extension years have to do with anything? Why is that even remotely important? FYI when a player signs an "extension" it is simply ripping up the old contract and signing a new one.

So all players who hold out are doing it because they feel "disrespected?" That's the standard here? Man, I thought standard was that they wanted more money... I can't even think of many players at all who broke contract because they felt "disrespected" by a draft pick.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:56

So all players who hold out are doing it because they feel "disrespected?" That's the standard here? Man, I thought standard was that they wanted more money... I can't even think of many players at all who broke contract because they felt "disrespected" by a draft pick.

Underpayment is a sign of disrespect - duh!

...as is any number of other holdout reasons, as I'm sure can/will be argued

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:57

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:46

Pugger wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 09:38

Isn't Tuesday the first day of training camp?

It likely is.

There is a very strong chance he doesn't show up to TC right away which means we will continue to just have questions.

1. Will he come later?
2. Will he come before week 1?
3. Will he come during the season?

If Rodgers isn't in GB next week, we will continue to know as little as we do today....for the exception of the "probability of a 2021 SB season being hopeful" goes down.

Good lord. I am very weary of this soap opera, frankly. Come on, Aaron! Make up your damn mind and stop with these freaking games. **** or get off the pot.

A few weeks to really see Love with his entire complement of weapons wouldn’t be the worst thing...

APB wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:01

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:56

So all players who hold out are doing it because they feel "disrespected?" That's the standard here? Man, I thought standard was that they wanted more money... I can't even think of many players at all who broke contract because they felt "disrespected" by a draft pick.

Underpayment is a sign of disrespect - duh!

...as is any number of other holdout reasons, as I'm sure can/will be argued

Underpayment as determined by...?

Half Empty wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:26

APB wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:01

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:56

So all players who hold out are doing it because they feel "disrespected?" That's the standard here? Man, I thought standard was that they wanted more money... I can't even think of many players at all who broke contract because they felt "disrespected" by a draft pick.

Underpayment is a sign of disrespect - duh!

...as is any number of other holdout reasons, as I'm sure can/will be argued

Underpayment as determined by...?

I believe he was being facetious.

Entirely possible, but here, as in almost all forums, it's often hard to tell. Some folks have really strange convictions, and I've seen enough references to compensation being the key to this problem that I didn't give it a second thought. Will figure it was so unless I head otherwise. Thanks.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:11

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

ya he's shaking in his boots competing against a QB that couldn't beat out Boyles for the backup gig last year, a QB that to my knowledge didn't dress for a game

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:29

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:11

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

ya he's shaking in his boots competing against a QB that couldn't beat out Boyles for the backup gig last year, a QB that to my knowledge didn't dress for a game

Then why is he throwing a hissy fit over it?

There's no doubt that the conversation starts to change if Love comes in and the coaches are like, "damn"

It would certainly make the Packers be "less bendy" when coming back to the negotiating table.

As a Packers fan, that is ultimately what we hope for. We want to see Love play really well whether that is as the #1 or #2 QB.

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:29

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:11

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

ya he's shaking in his boots competing against a QB that couldn't beat out Boyles for the backup gig last year, a QB that to my knowledge didn't dress for a game

Dont feed the trolls.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:47

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:29

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:11

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

ya he's shaking in his boots competing against a QB that couldn't beat out Boyles for the backup gig last year, a QB that to my knowledge didn't dress for a game

Dont feed the trolls.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:37

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:29

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 11:11

The long and short of it seems to be Rodgers doesn't want competition. Competition makes teams better.

ya he's shaking in his boots competing against a QB that couldn't beat out Boyles for the backup gig last year, a QB that to my knowledge didn't dress for a game

Then why is he throwing a hissy fit over it?

wha????? where you been for the last 125 pages, on a mission to the far reaches of our solar system

according to Mr. Ron Wolf he wants Opy's job, maybe Gutys too, and at minimum wants access to the war room so we don't pass on any more Justin Jeffersons, oh ya, and more Money